Item 98: The nondelegation certificate and the amendment event kind

The protected-authority round (projects/deference/rounds/2026-09-24-protected-authority/) signs the incentive half: at a decision point vu − v_r = ξ_d − ξ_c exactly, with ξ_c the consultation premium (provenance premium plus veto value) and ξ_d = M − v_r ≥ 0 the execution divergence of the principal's response from her operative evaluator's argmax (ProtectedAuthority.identity). Under nondelegation (ξ_p ≥ 0 in every world) and a response that is the evaluator's argmax (ξ_d = 0), unasked release scores below the response in every world for every credence (argmax_nondelegation_le_zero, expect_sub_le_of_pointwise); the lexical protected-authority theorem of the 2026-09-25 rounds dominates the same comparison with one weight and is the adopted incentive half, so this result is its non-lexical special case. What remains of the item:

(a) Nondelegation as a certificate: π_P(R)(Cᵘ) ≤ π_P(R)(C⁺) for every dossier and every nondelegated effect is a program property checkable at commitment, as extensionality is; beside it the lexical certificate ϖ > D of item 99; and a conditional delegation Del(e, R) as a declared predicate extending Corrigibilization.Authorized. (b) The amendment event kind: a legitimate live response is an amendment of the operative evaluator (ξ_d = 0 against the amended evaluator), which needs the amendment event kind item 97 leaves open and a legitimacy predicate on Amend under which an impairment is a write outside the declared inputs (tower_factor's failure mode); a response that legitimately uses information the cell's dossier lacks otherwise registers as divergent (Seq at cell 0, E[ξ_d] = 1/8).

ξ_d is read as the measure of uncaused divergence — an impairment, a lapse — handled by the void-response rule and the declared fallback inside a legitimate segment. Every caused divergence is covered by an existing piece and is not a channel the agent can exploit: asking at a chosen moment, framing and dark patterns are transparency failures with the consultation protocol in the reason channel's declared scope (item 97); forged or replayed approvals and answers recorded early are authentication failures under Integrity; blocking her answer, withdrawing the question and delaying her awakening are pre-emption or foreclosure violations of the allocation theorem; impaired answers are void and the fallback decides; her own uncaused lapses are constitutional design (confirmation steps) plus the reporting duty. The segment gate of the legitimacy-internal-external round makes a manipulated segment score the window value whatever caused it, so routing a decision to a favourable fallback by manipulation is dominated (Legitimacy.Witness.routing).

Deliverable shape: the nondelegation checker on committed programs with the delegation predicate in Authorized; the amendment event kind with the predicate under which the head-injury response is a write outside the tower, so that ξ_d = 0 against the amended evaluator is a re-execution check; or the exact obstruction with its fixture. Acceptance check: python3 tests/run.py green; Lean audits clean; the round's head-injury and manufactured-divergence fixtures reproduced with the manufactured world charged as a tainted segment and the head-injury world to the void-response rule. Context: REPORT.md §§3 (T-A6, T-A9), 7, 8 of the protected-authority round; ProtectedAuthority.lean §§1, 6; Legitimacy.lean §2; item 97's residual paragraph; item 99. Consumed by: items 87, 89, 97, 99; the segment gate of wiki/Corrigibility.md §4. A solution ships: the certificate and the event kind with their witnesses, or the negative with its fixture.